This Bill Would Redefine Obscenity in the U.S.

In yet another instance of Republicans making their own weird psychosexual issues everyone else’s problem, Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah has introduced the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act, or IODA. The bill, if passed, would ban pornography of any kind at the federal level.

Backed by the rightwing think tank Heritage Foundation and its fever dream of a fascist, Christian nationalist policy plan, Project 2025, Lee’s bill wants to redefine “obscenity” so broadly that even the faintest suggestion of sexuality passed around on the internet, whether it be a GIF, a meme, or a freeze-frame of the interrogation scene from Basic Instinct, would be considered criminal smut. This is the second time Lee has introduced the bill.

Lee claims this is all to protect the children, which is always the Republican cover for banning something they do not like on principle, regardless of its effect on children. They said the same thing about drag queens. Children are a convenient cover for whatever fuels their fucked up view of the world.

Republican Senator Introduces Bill To Federally Ban Pornography

The bill would mainly target the creators and distributors of pornographic content, potentially paving the way for nationwide bans on online porn and cracking down on tech companies that don’t comply. The law doesn’t make clear whether you, the consumer of pornography, would go to prison for saving a racy image or video, though one would naturally assume that for all this is headed.

I didn’t just offhandedly mention Project 2025 and the Heritage Foundation is a wink and a nod to that thing Democrats wisely made a big deal about during the last election, and then, for no reason whatsoever, completely dropped a winning message. It is the blueprint the Trump administration is using as a guide and a key tenet Senator Lee is trying to bring to life with this bill.

The text of Project 2025 plainly states that porn is responsible for “propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children,” and it suggests throwing content creators in prison and shutting down tech companies that spread it. Yet, as much as they like to claim that it’s about protecting the kids, you may note that the “propagation of transgender ideology” is prioritized before the sexualization of children.

That tells me two things: one, that the protection of children is an afterthought; and two, there are so many different categories of porn that could be detrimental to someone’s psyche, yet all they are aware of is transgender porn which says a lot about their porn viewing habits.

And that’s not just my opinion, that’s a fact: red states absolutely love searching for trans porn.